April 13, 2010

Colbert Owns Wiki Leak (UPDATE: Video and More PWNAGE Added)

***Bumped because we're all posting at the same time***

When my students tell me how much they love John Stewart I usually tell them that Stephen Colbert is way better. Sure, I tell them, John Stewart has the smartest writers in late night, but Stephen Colbert has the funniest. And in comedy, I'll take the latter over the former any day of the week.

But in the battle of the brains between Colbert and Stewart, it looks like Colbert wins. Hands down.

Let’s talk about this footage that has gotten you so much attention recently. This is footage of an Apache helicopter attack in 2007. The army described this as a group that gave resistance at the time, that doesn’t seem to be happening. But there are armed men in the group, they did find a rocket propelled grenade among the group, the Reuters photographers who were regrettably killed, were not identified…You have edited this tape, and you have given it a title called ‘collateral murder.’

That’s not leaking, that’s a pure editorial. ...

“you have properly manipulated the audience into an emotional state you want before something goes on the air.”

For dedication to the troops slimed by Wiki Leak, The Colbert Report is now the official late night show of The Jawa Report. And make sure to pronounce The Jawa Report with its proper French inflection from now on.

UPDATE: Wow, what a liar Julian Assange is. Again, lying by omissions and slight of hand. Maybe the word "RPG" wasn't used before the go signal for firing on the insurgents, that might technically be true. But go watch the video below again.

And I quote:

"Okay, we got fifteen coming at you. It's a guy with a weapon...."

"There's about, uh, four or five ... this location and there's more that keep walking by and one of them has a weapon...."

"See all those people standing down there? Have individuals with weapons."

[Camera zooms to guy with RPG] "Yeah, he's got a weapon too..."

"Have five to six individuals with AK-47s. Request permission to engage."

"Roger that. We have no personnel east of our position. So, uh, you are free to engage."

It's at this point that they are given permission to engage. Weapons were identified, an RPG could be clearly seen, and AK-47s were identified before permission to fire was granted.

Again, the founder of Wiki Leak isn't technically lying when he says the "word RPG" isn't used, but this is a distraction meant to fool the casual observer into thinking that the order to fire was given before weapons were seen.

He even claims that there is still a dispute over whether or not an RPG was ever at the scene. A dispute only because some idiots don't want to see the obvious.

At least one RPG and AK-47 clearly seen before permission to fire given. The pilots then mistake camera slings for AK-47 slings, but the Reuters photographers were clearly with Mahdi Army insurgents.

RPG? What RPG?

And finally, another implication in the statement that there is a dispute over whether or not an RPG was really found is that the US is covering something up. Indeed, the only evidence that an RPG was found is a redacted photo released by the DOD in which no RPG is seen because it is too close to a dead body.

But thanks to Bohica 22, we can definitively show that the redacted part of the photo does, in fact, show an RPG. Click on it for larger.

On one thing I will agree with the highly edited and editorialized version of the Wiki Leak video seen by the 90% of viewers cited by Colbert: the first casualty in war is indeed the truth.

----

If you haven't seen this video rejoinder made by the Wiki Leak Deception website, you really need to watch. Then, send the link to all your friends.

One thing they point out that I hadn't noticed before is that the van of so-called "good Samaritans" had been spotted earlier in the unedited film .... dropping off insurgents!

As to whether or not Colbert wasn't serious with his questions? I dunno, I guess it's possible that this was just part of the shtick, but I think not.

However, the larger point Ed makes might be the one that Colbert himself makes when he argues that Assange is being disingenuous about just wanting "the truth" out there since 90% of people won't actually take the time to view the entire unedited video so they are bound to believe the "murder" charge.

Perhaps by not knowing which parts of Colbert's interview are shtick and which parts are serious criticism of Assange, the casual viewer will be left with the impression that there is some validity to Assange's charges? I hope not.

Clearly, Assange has an agenda and that agenda is hostile to the United States and its military. I think Colbert knows this, but I can only hope his viewers do too.

UPDATE:Go read Uncle Jimbo's comments over at one of my favorite millblogs. Here's a teaser, it ends like this:

Love to have drinks with you sometime Julian, and if that sounds like a threat just remember I'm a pacifist.